From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HwKPx-0004oM-P5 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:00:58 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l57FxKRs008255; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 15:59:20 GMT Received: from shuttle.zlin.dk (port78.ds1-abs.adsl.cybercity.dk [212.242.227.17]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l57Ft0m2003524 for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 15:55:00 GMT Received: from BA.zlin.dk (unknown [10.0.0.3]) by shuttle.zlin.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id B178D3006A for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2007 17:54:57 +0200 (CEST) From: Bo =?iso-8859-1?q?=D8rsted_Andresen?= To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] why multiple versions of java-config, automake, and autoconf? Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 17:54:40 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <20070606234438.GE2575@nibiru.local> In-Reply-To: <20070606234438.GE2575@nibiru.local> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3063499.Jbd2GxlWzp"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200706071754.53896.bo.andresen@zlin.dk> X-Archives-Salt: 9ac3f6c5-5432-4ef1-892b-e75fb478ceda X-Archives-Hash: d6ec95c450bda2fdcce2c8d166110fef --nextPart3063499.Jbd2GxlWzp Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 07 June 2007 01:44:39 Enrico Weigelt wrote: > > Now... Why are there multiple versions of java-config, > > autoconf, and automake shown on my system? > > These are packages totally incompatible and so different > packages under the same name. They're sometimes necessary, > since certain projects still require very old version, > even if upgrade wouldn't be such a problem and has already > been done by contributors (ie. mozilla). Well, they still are different versions under the same packages from the sa= me=20 projects. > Gentoo has an strange magic for handling that, called "Slots". > They deeply break the linear version space. This makes handling > very tricky and requires much additional complexity. Some of > the other replies should make clear some prolems ... I have no idea what breaking 'the linear version space' means. And I don't = see=20 how having automake in 7 different packages instead of seven slots under th= e=20 same package makes it any less complex. How is having a depend on =3Dsys-devel/automake-1.4* or sys-devel/automake:= 1.4=20 any more complex than a depend on a separate packages named=20 sys-devel/automake-1.4 ? There are actuallly packages in the tree that don'= t=20 care which version of automake is in use (at least according to there=20 ebuilds). Now they just depend on sys-devel/automake. With your brilliant=20 solution they would have to depend on || ( sys-devel/automake-1.4=20 sys-devel/automake-1.5 ... ). > No idea, why the responsible Gentoo-devs didn't just give > those incompatible packages different names, especially on > their own packages. AFAIK, java-config is made by Gentoo. > It would be trivial, just to call the 2.x version something > like java-config-2 ... perhaps too simple for them ? It still doesn't change the problem that if they have different files with = the=20 same name they need to install it in different places. That problem is just= =20 the same whether in slots or separate packages. [SNIP] > As someone else already that: one of the problems with slots. > They don't work well on cleanup. I wonder if anybody ever thought > about that when slots were introduced. =2D-depclean does actually remove unneeded slots now for packages not in sy= stem=20 or world. By removing slotting you take away flexibility and make things in a source= =20 distribution harder. Not easier. Yes, it sucks that our current EAPI doesn'= t=20 support that flexibility properly (by allowing slot deps) and that our=20 current package manager doesn't support the flexibility that use deps would= =20 provide (hence dying in pkg_setup when a use flag was required). But the lo= ng=20 term solution is not to remove the flexibility that these concepts provide= =20 but rather to support it properly in the package manager and EAPI. =2D-=20 Bo Andresen --nextPart3063499.Jbd2GxlWzp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBGaCpN8/kKEzmwNNoRAuJ9AKC9b1vxBpDTPee5wlWQVfOu+ye3GACdEeLr 4AKjnN3qB22A9iTYrI8VJOs= =9EQG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3063499.Jbd2GxlWzp-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list